TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1739
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned. 3. Since, certified copy of the judgment is placed in main matter which is tagged with the review petition, the applications seeking exemption for filing the certified copies are also allowed. Other defects are waived. 4. The contention of the petitioner-appellant is that the legal heirs of the original Ruler are no longer Ruler, therefore, exemption which was granted u/s 10(19A) is not available to the present assessee. 5. She has taken us to the order of the Supreme Court in Maharao Bhim Singh of Kota Thr. Maharao Brij Raj Singh, Kota vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajasthan-II, Jaipur wherein it has been observed as under:- "34. We find that in Section 10(19A) of the I.T. Act, the Legislature has used the expression "palace" f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Order, 1949 , or the Part B States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1950 , or, as the case may be, the Jammu and Kashmir (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1958 : Provided that for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1972 , the annual value of every such palace in the occupation of such Ruler during the relevant previous year shall be exempt from incometax;] (20) the income of a local authority which is chargeable under the head" Income from house property"," Capital gains", or" Income from other sources" or from a trade or business carried on by it which accrues or arises from the supply of a commodity or service (not being water or electricity) within its own jurisdictional area or from the supply of water or electricit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by virtue of a declaration by the Central Government under paragraph 13 of the Merged States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1949 or paragraph 15 of the Part B State (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1950 is exempt under section 5(1)(iii), for assessment years 1957-58 to 1992-93 and further as per Section 10(19A) the annual value of any one palace of occupation of the ruler, being a palace, the annual value whereof was exempt from Income Tax before the commencement of the Constitution (Twenty sixth Amendment) Act, 1971 by virtue of the provisions of the Merged States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1949 or the part B States (Taxation Concession) Order, 1950 or, as the case may be, the Jammu & Kashmir (Taxation concession) Order, 1958. Thus, as per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....SC 1663 that the minor Maharaj Kokendrajit Singh of Manipur who has been recognized by the President as the successor of his deceased father, must be held to be a ruler under Article 366(22) and he is entitled to claim the status of a Ruler of the former State of Manipur. Thus reorganization by the President is the sine qua non to become the successor of the Ex- Ruler, which in the present case is admittedly missing. Further Article 366(22) is a provision relating to recognition of Rulers, which is the direct, and only purpose of the said provision. Thus in the instant case no such recognition has been accorded to the assessee by the President hence on bare perusal of Article 366(22) of Constitution of India the appeal deserves to be allowe....